Podcasts about Schelling

This episode was recorded live at Schelling Point during Eth Denver 2025. In our fourth Rehash Hot Ones show, competitors Kevin Owocki, Disruption Joe, Sophia Dew, and Rena O'Brien battle it out for who has the spiciest takes on DAO governance, web3 funding, and the potential for AI to address challenges in crypto. Along the way, they brave increasingly spicy hot sauces, and audience members participate with their own hot takes as well while also engaging in the interactive spice challenge on stage. Finally, votes are tallied live on JokeRace and a winner is crowned. ⏳ TIMESTAMPS: 0:00 Intro 01:57 Panelist introductions 03:10 Rules and voting 04:28 Round 1: Does DAO Governance Work? 18:13 Round 2: Best Way to Fund Web3 Projects 27:43 Round 3: Can AI Fix Crypto? 37:35 Winner announced 

O idealismo alemão é um dos períodos mais ricos e complexos da história da filosofia, e seus quatro grandes representantes são Kant, Fichte, Schelling e Hegel. Este é também o contexto filosófico imediato do qual surgiu Karl Marx, pensador que desenvolve várias discussões abordadas por estes pensadores. Alguns idealistas alemães estão entre os filósofos mais complexos que podemos estudar na história da filosofia, como Kant e Hegel, por exemplo. Não tentaremos, por isso, abordar todos em apenas um episódio, mas faremos um recorte em Fichte e Hegel a fim de oferecer uma introdução acessível a alguns de seus principais temas políticos e sociais.- Curso "Filosofia para a vida: refletir para viver melhor": https://www.udemy.com/course/filosofia-para-a-vida-refletir-para-viver-melhor/?couponCode=2CF8DF1A6BC4492EE55F- Curso "Introdução à filosofia - dos pré-socráticos a Sartre": https://www.udemy.com/course/introducao-a-filosofia-dos-pre-socraticos-a-sartre/?couponCode=09119858437DF09EE684- Curso "Crítica da religião: Feuerbach, Nietzsche e Freud": https://www.udemy.com/course/critica-da-religiao-feuerbach-nietzsche-e-freud/?couponCode=66DD7D9B385722D0170B- Curso "A filosofia de Karl Marx - uma introdução": https://www.udemy.com/course/a-filosofia-de-karl-marx-uma-introducao/?couponCode=60AA3786461A5A581E44- Inscreva-se gratuitamente em nossa newsletter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://filosofiavermelha.org/index.php/newsletter/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠- Apoia.se: seja um de nossos apoiadores e mantenha este trabalho no ar: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://apoia.se/filosofiavermelha⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠- Nossa chave PIX: filosofiavermelha@gmail.com- Adquira meu livro: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.almarevolucionaria.com/product-page/pr%C3%A9-venda-duvidar-de-tudo-ensaios-sobre-filosofia-e-psican%C3%A1lise⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠- Meu site: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.filosofiaepsicanalise.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠- Clube de leitura: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWEjNgKjqqI⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Um dos objetivos deste episódio é desfazer uma enorme incompreensão sobre o idealismo alemão. Ao ouvir a palavra “idealismo”, muitos pensam se tratar de uma postura ingênua e distante do mundo, preocupada apenas com “ideias”, o que é um erro grosseiro. Mostraremos que principalmente Fichte e Hegel são a fonte de várias ideias de Marx, e que o idealismo alemão, de certo modo, não está muito distante do materialismo. Não é verdade que até Marx, os filósofos se limitaram apenas a interpretar o mundo, sem se preocupar com sua transformação.

Ultraschallgeräte gibt es in fast jeder Praxis. Dennoch werden Patienten oft ans MRT oder Röntgen verwiesen. Muss das immer sein? Dazu Prof. Jörg Schelling, Hausarzt und Allgemeinmediziner.

This is the third in a series of episodes with world-leading product management  experts about how we might build product management best practices into team leadership. Alex Komoroske spent years as either a Product Manager or Director of Product Management for platforms that most of us use every day: Chrome, Google Maps, Google Earth, and others. He then went on to lead corporate strategy at Stripe, another platform most of us use every day.  While at Google, Alex wrote an internal how-to called “Practical PM Stuff” that many Google PMs referred to as the Product Managers Bible.  It covered everything from basics like how to answer an email to esoterica like the difference between complexity and ambiguity or how Schelling points form in organizations. In this episode, Dart and Alex discuss:- Work as an ecosystem, not a machine- Indirect influence over direct control- How frameworks can kill creativity- The role of product management in work design- How companies stifle innovation- The power of riding momentum- Managers as curators, not controllers- Balancing autonomy and structure- Why great ideas bypass leadership- And other topics...Alex Komoroske is a product leader and systems thinker who specializes in platforms and ecosystems. Alex is known for his "Gardening Platforms" approach, which encourages guiding ecosystems toward greatness instead of controlling them. Now Co-CEO of Common Tools, he continues to explore how technology and organizations evolve.Resources Mentioned:Finite and Infinite Games, by James Carse: https://www.amazon.com/Finite-Infinite-Games-James-Carse/dp/1476731713The Stacy Barton conversation about Disney storytelling and work. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/immersive-experience-design-how-to-use-story-to-design/id1612743401?i=1000599527522 The Marty Cagan conversation about product management and work   https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/how-to-design-products-people-love-principles-and/id1612743401?i=1000668997003 The David Obstfeld conversation about brokering social networks and work https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/social-networks-the-1-predictor-of-economic/id1612743401?i=1000677462011 Connect with Alex:Website: https://www.komoroske.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-komoroske-6597336/Twitter: https://x.com/komoramaWork with Dart:Dart is the CEO and co-founder of the work design firm 11fold. Build work that makes employees feel alive, connected to their work, and focused on what's most important to the business. Book a call at 11fold.com.

Jim talks with Adam B. Levine about AI programming aids for non-techies and the future of Bitcoin. They discuss Adam's background as a "technical non-technical" person, the evolution from manual LLM prompting to using IDEs, Windsurf as an AI-first IDE, Claude 3.7's thinking mode, productivity improvements with AI coding tools, different platforms like Cursor and Cline, the "pure idea space" vs technical execution, the role of liberal arts people in tech teams, Bitcoin as digital gold, Schelling points in cryptocurrency, the US dollar as hegemonic currency, "pools of fools" theory, sovereign wealth funds moving into Bitcoin, El Salvador's Bitcoin investment, Texas and Wyoming considering sovereign Bitcoin funds, game theory of nation-state Bitcoin adoption, regulatory transitions, predictions about Bitcoin's future based on sovereign adoption, and much more. Episode Transcript The Diamond Age: Or, a Young Lady's Illustrated Primer, by Neal Stephenson Speaking of Bitcoin Podcast (formerly Let's Talk Bitcoin!) Adam B. Levine has spent over a decade pioneering disruptive technologies before they become mainstream. He launched one of the earliest Bitcoin podcasts, Let's Talk Bitcoin! (2013), founded Tokenly (2014)—one of the earliest companies exploring what could be done with blockchain tokens—and served as CoinDesk's first podcast editor (2019), hosting shows like Speaking of Bitcoin and Markets Daily. In 2021, he founded 330.ai, a startup building cutting-edge tools to boost creativity with AI.

Show Notes Professor Susan Long and Dr. Simon Western's conversation takes us on a journey into the roots of the unconscious, tracing its lineage from early philosophical thought to contemporary psychoanalysis. Susan challenges the dominant view that confines the unconscious to an individual and pathological framework, arguing instead for a more expansive understanding—one that is inherently social, cultural, and even ecological. She draws on thinkers like Schelling, whose work connects the unconscious with nature and spirit, suggesting that our inner depths are not isolated but enmeshed in the world around us. She critiques the ideological structures that shape how we perceive the unconscious, drawing on the Frankfurt School's insights into culture and power. At the heart of this discussion is the notion that creativity—so often seen as an individual gift—actually emerges from the collective unconscious, offering both potential and peril. This conversation invites us to consider the ethical dimension of confronting the unconscious, urging us to move beyond mere self-awareness and towards a deeper responsibility—to ourselves, our communities, and the wider world. Key Reflections The unconscious has historical roots that predate Freud. Schelling's work links the unconscious to nature and spirit. The unconscious is not just individual but also social and cultural. Creativity emerges from the collective unconscious. The Frankfurt School critiques how ideologies embed in culture. Human beings can be both creative and destructive. Neuroscience offers insights into the emotional aspects of the unconscious. The bicameral mind theory suggests a collective consciousness. Facing uncomfortable truths is an ethical responsibility. Individuality should not overshadow our connection to the community. Keywords unconscious, psychoanalysis, Schelling, Freud, social dynamics, creativity, Frankfurt School, group mind, nature, ethical responsibility Brief Bio Professor Susan Long is PhD Co-Lead and Research Lead at NIODA and former Professor of Creative and Sustainable Organisation at RMIT University, Melbourne. She supervises doctoral candidates, teaches in global programs such as INSEAD's Master of Coaching and Consulting (Singapore), and consults on leadership, organisational change, and executive coaching. A trained clinical psychologist and psychotherapist, Susan has a deep interest in the unconscious and its influence on individuals, groups, and organisations. She has served on advisory boards, including Comcare's Centre of Excellence for Research into Mental Health at Work, and was the founding President of Group Relations Australia. She is also a past President of the International Society for the Psychoanalytic Study of Organisations (ISPSO), where she contributed to advancing psychoanalytic approaches to leadership and organisational life. Her latest book, The Evolution of the Unconscious: Exploring Persons, Groups, Nature and Spirit, traces the historical development of unconscious thought, from early philosophical ideas to contemporary psychoanalysis. She explores how the unconscious operates not only within individuals but also within social, ecological, and spiritual dimensions. Through this lens, she challenges reductionist views and offers a broader, interconnected understanding.

In February of 2013, a 21-year-old woman mysteriously disappeared during a visit to see her on-again, off-again boyfriend after he told her he had a “surprise gift” for her. A subsequent investigation uncovered strange text messages, perplexing surveillance footage, and an important insider tip from an unsuspecting witness. This is the story of Kelsie Schelling.

Today we talk about the relationship between philosophy and religion. We talk about the duck-rabbit as a metaphor that may have something useful to teach us about the way we experience reality. We talk about the enormous difficulty of fully addressing the question: what is religion? We talk about Schelling's historical view of revelation and its connection to a possible new era of Christian religious practice. Hope you love it! :) Sponsors: Harry's: https://www.harrys.com/PHILOSOPHIZE Nord VPN: https://nordvpn.com/philothis Thank you so much for listening! Could never do this without your help.  Website: https://www.philosophizethis.org/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/philosophizethis  Social: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/philosophizethispodcast X: https://twitter.com/iamstephenwest Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/philosophizethisshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Einmal großes Blutbild, bitte! Aber was wird da eigentlich untersucht? Und was sagen uns die Ergebnisse? Der Allgemeinmediziner Prof. Jörg Schelling beantwortet Fragen zu Blutwerten und erklärt, was unser Blut für Aufgaben hat.

In dieser Episode ist die vielfach ausgezeichnete Spitzenköchin Sigi Schelling zu Gast. Nach 14 Jahren im legendären Tantris führt sie nun erfolgreich ihr eigenes Restaurant im Werneckhof in München, wo sie klassische Fine-Dining-Küche zeitgemäß interpretiert. Für sie stehen exzellente Produkte und deren präzise Verarbeitung im Mittelpunkt. Im Gespräch erzählt sie von ihrem Weg in die Selbstständigkeit, ihren Werten in der Küchenführung und ihrer Leidenschaft für authentische Gastfreundschaft. Sigi berichtet, wie sie nach Jahren an der Seite von Hans Haas den Mut fand, ihr eigenes Restaurant zu eröffnen. Ihre Disziplin und der respektvolle Umgang mit dem Team bilden dabei die Grundlage für den täglichen Betrieb. Es geht nicht nur ums Kochen, sondern auch um die Verbindung zu ihren Gästen. Persönliche Gespräche und maßgeschneiderte Menüs spielen für sie eine zentrale Rolle. Viele ihrer Zutaten stammen vom Hof ihres Bruders in Österreich, was ihren Anspruch an Nachhaltigkeit und Qualität unterstreicht. Im Gespräch wird auch deutlich, wie wichtig Sigi der Ausgleich zur Arbeit ist. Sport, vor allem Rennradfahren und Fitness, helfen ihr abzuschalten. Kreativität in der Küche entsteht für sie aus alltäglichen Beobachtungen und hochwertigen Zutaten. Ideen für neue Gerichte kommen spontan, entwickeln sich aber über Zeit. Dabei bleibt sie sich immer treu: Geschmack geht vor Optik. Sigi spricht offen über die Herausforderungen, als Frau in der Spitzenküche erfolgreich zu sein. Respekt und klare Kommunikation sind für sie essenziell. Sie glaubt daran, dass Leistung im Vordergrund steht, unabhängig vom Geschlecht. Ihre Erfahrungen haben sie geprägt, und sie will diese künftig in Kochkursen weitergeben. Auch ein eigenes Kochbuch steht auf ihrer Liste – ein Projekt, das noch Zeit braucht, aber fest in ihren Plänen verankert ist. Zum Schluss teilt sie Gedanken zu ihren kulinarischen Inspirationsquellen. Reisen nach Japan, Norwegen und in die USA stehen für sie noch aus. Diese Ziele sollen neue Impulse bringen und die Kreativität weiter fördern. Die Episode endet mit einem Blick in die Zukunft, in der Sigi ihren Weg weiterhin mit Leidenschaft und Authentizität verfolgt. Links zu dieser Episode: Sigi Schelling - Werrneckhof: https://werneckhof-schelling.de Sigi Schelling - Werrneckhof bei Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/werneckhof_schelling/ Foodtalker bei Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/foodtalker_podcast/ Werbung - Diese Episode wird unterstützt und präsentiert von: CUCINARIA - der Küchentempel: Das Fachgeschäft für Küche, Kochen und Kaffeekultur in Hamburg-Eppendorf: https://www.cucinaria.de Der Große Restaurant & Hotel Guide: Ein Guide für Gäste - Inspirationen für Menschen mit Stil und Geschmack: https://www.der-grosse-guide.de Episoden-Typ

In this episode, Ben Watkins sits down to discuss the Van Tillian tradition of presuppositional apologetics often found online along with objective idealism— an epistemological view often associated with Post-Kantians like Hegel, Fichte, and Schelling. Two claims of Van Til are challenged using the resources of objective idealism: Those two claims are (i) Christianity is a necessary condition to know anything at all and (ii) the Christian and the non-Christian have no neutral ground to resolve their disagreements. In addition to challenging these claims by appeal to a form of objective idealism, Ben also gives a brief exposition of the argument from divine hiddenness. Contrary to Van Til and other presuppositional apologetics, it is not the case everyone believes God exists. In fact, there are some people who do not believe God exists, and this fact is evidence for atheism over theism.

Sanskrit translations, a deep bioregional sense of place and homages to dead (mostly) poet friends makes Andrew Schelling's new book a compelling distillation of subjects he's been tracking for over 40 years. Author of “Tracks Along The Left Coast: Jaime D'Angulo & Pacific Coast Culture” and “From the Arapaho Songbook” and many other titles, he lives in the mountains outside of Boulder, Colorado, and teaches poetry and Sanskrit at Naropa University. The new book is Forests, Temples and Glacial Rivers, published by Empty Bowl.

Immanuel Kant was popular at his death. The whole town emptied out to see him. His last words were "it is good". But was his philosophy any good? In order to find out, we dive into Chapter 7 of Conjectures and Refutations: Kant's Critique and Cosmology, where Popper rescues Kant's reputation from the clutches of the dastardly German Idealists. We discuss Deontology vs consquentialism vs virtue ethics Kant's Categorical Imperative Kant's contributions to cosmology and politics Kant as a defender of the enlightenment Romanticism vs (German) idealism vs critical rationalism Kant's cosmology and cosmogony Kant's antimony and his proofs that the universe is both finite and infinite in time Kant's Copernican revolution and transcendental idealism Kant's morality Why Popper admired Kant so much, and why he compares him to Socrates Quotes Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one's understanding without guidance from another. This immaturity is self-imposed when its cause lies not in lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude! "Have courage to use your own understanding!" --that is the motto of enlightenment. - An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? (Translated by Ted Humphrey, Hackett Publishing, 1992) (Alternate translation from Popper: Enlightenment is the emancipation of man from a state of self-imposed tutelage . . . of incapacity to use his own intelligence without external guidance. Such a state of tutelage I call ‘self-imposed' if it is due, not to lack of intelligence, but to lack of courage or determination to use one's own intelligence without the help of a leader. Sapere aude! Dare to use your own intelligence! This is the battle-cry of the Enlightenment.) - C&R, Chap 6 What lesson did Kant draw from these bewildering antinomies? He concluded that our ideas of space and time are inapplicable to the universe as a whole. We can, of course, apply the ideas of space and time to ordinary physical things and physical events. But space and time themselves are neither things nor events: they cannot even be observed: they are more elusive. They are a kind of framework for things and events: something like a system of pigeon-holes, or a filing system, for observations. Space and time are not part of the real empir- ical world of things and events, but rather part of our mental outfit, our apparatus for grasping this world. Their proper use is as instruments of observation: in observing any event we locate it, as a rule, immediately and intuitively in an order of space and time. Thus space and time may be described as a frame of reference which is not based upon experience but intuitively used in experience, and properly applicable to experience. This is why we get into trouble if we misapply the ideas of space and time by using them in a field which transcends all possible experience—as we did in our two proofs about the universe as a whole. ... To the view which I have just outlined Kant chose to give the ugly and doubly misleading name ‘Transcendental Idealism'. He soon regretted this choice, for it made people believe that he was an idealist in the sense of denying the reality of physical things: that he declared physical things to be mere ideas. Kant hastened to explain that he had only denied that space and time are empirical and real — empirical and real in the sense in which physical things and events are empirical and real. But in vain did he protest. His difficult style sealed his fate: he was to be revered as the father of German Idealism. I suggest that it is time to put this right. - C&R, Chap 6 Kant believed in the Enlightenment. He was its last great defender. I realize that this is not the usual view. While I see Kant as the defender of the Enlightenment, he is more often taken as the founder of the school which destroyed it—of the Romantic School of Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. I contend that these two interpretations are incompatible. Fichte, and later Hegel, tried to appropriate Kant as the founder of their school. But Kant lived long enough to reject the persistent advances of Fichte, who proclaimed himself Kant's successor and heir. In A Public Declaration Concerning Fichte, which is too little known, Kant wrote: ‘May God protect us from our friends. . . . For there are fraudulent and perfidious so-called friends who are scheming for our ruin while speaking the language of good-will.' - C&R, Chap 6 As Kant puts it, Copernicus, finding that no progress was being made with the theory of the revolving heavens, broke the deadlock by turning the tables, as it were: he assumed that it is not the heavens which revolve while we the observers stand still, but that we the observers revolve while the heavens stand still. In a similar way, Kant says, the problem of scientific knowledge is to be solved — the problem how an exact science, such as Newtonian theory, is possible, and how it could ever have been found. We must give up the view that we are passive observers, waiting for nature to impress its regularity upon us. Instead we must adopt the view that in digesting our sense-data we actively impress the order and the laws of our intellect upon them. Our cosmos bears the imprint of our minds. - C&R, Chap 6 From Kant the cosmologist, the philosopher of knowledge and of science, I now turn to Kant the moralist. I do not know whether it has been noticed before that the fundamental idea of Kant's ethics amounts to another Copernican Revolution, analogous in every respect to the one I have described. For Kant makes man the lawgiver of morality just as he makes him the lawgiver of nature. And in doing so he gives back to man his central place both in his moral and in his physical universe. Kant humanized ethics, as he had humanized science. ... Kant's Copernican Revolution in the field of ethics is contained in his doctrine of autonomy—the doctrine that we cannot accept the command of an authority, however exalted, as the ultimate basis of ethics. For whenever we are faced with a command by an authority, it is our responsibility to judge whether this command is moral or immoral. The authority may have power to enforce its commands, and we may be powerless to resist. But unless we are physically prevented from choosing the responsibility remains ours. It is our decision whether to obey a command, whether to accept authority. - C&R, Chap 6 Stepping back further to get a still more distant view of Kant's historical role, we may compare him with Socrates. Both were accused of perverting the state religion, and of corrupting the minds of the young. Both denied the charge; and both stood up for freedom of thought. Freedom meant more to them than absence of constraint; it was for both a way of life. ... To this Socratic idea of self-sufficiency, which forms part of our western heritage, Kant has given a new meaning in the fields of both knowledge and morals. And he has added to it further the idea of a community of free men—of all men. For he has shown that every man is free; not because he is born free, but because he is born with the burden of responsibility for free decision. - C&R, Chap 6 Socials Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link Become a patreon subscriber here (https://www.patreon.com/Increments). Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here (https://ko-fi.com/increments). Click dem like buttons on youtube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_4wZzQyoW4s4ZuE4FY9DQQ) Follow the Kantian Imperative: Stop masturbating and/or/while getting your hair cut, and start sending emails over to incrementspodcast@gmail.com.

durée : 01:23:54 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda, Mathias Le Gargasson, Antoine Dhulster - Par Michel Cazenave et Lucile Laveggi - Avec des lectures de Claude Bermann, Christine Brücher et Jacqueline Taouss - Réalisation Christiane Mallarmé - réalisation : Massimo Bellini

Ab 15.1.2025 haben alle gesetzlich Versicherten eine elektronische Patientenakte, kurz ePA. Aber was bedeutet das? Wer trägt da was ein und wer darf das lesen? Alle Fragen rund um die ePA beantwortet Hausarzt Prof. Jörg Schelling.

Naomi Fisher is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Loyola University Chicago. She earned her Ph.D in philosophy from the University of Notre Dame in 2016, and prior to that earned her M.S. in physics from UC Davis.Her research focuses on Kant and German Idealism and Romanticism, specifically the relationship between nature, freedom, and rationality in Kant and Schelling. Currently, she is working on projects related to the impact of Plato and Neoplatonism on Schelling's philosophy. She also has interests in the broader history of philosophy, philosophy of science, and philosophy of religion.In her talk, she discusses: The disconnect between epiphanies and everyday thoughtOn the function of imagination in philosophyThe philosophy of art according to SchellingManifesting the divine through the power of imaginationComparing Schelling's work to the RomanticsOn accessing transcendent realitiesTo learn more about Naomi, you can find her at: Website: https://naomifisher.weebly.com/ Email: naomi.luce@gmail.com This episode is sponsored by:John Templeton Foundation (https://www.templeton.org/)Templeton Religion Trust (https://templetonreligiontrust.org/)Support the show

As a listener of TOE you can get a special 20% off discount to The Economist and all it has to offer! Visit https://www.economist.com/toe In today's episode of Theories of Everything, Curt Jaimungal speaks with Matthew Segall, a professor at the California Institute of Integral Studies, on the evolution of philosophical thought, linking ancient teachings on consciousness to modern scientific perspectives. We delve into the limitations of contemporary views of reality, paralleling them with the Ptolemaic model, and explore how an awareness of mortality can enrich our understanding of existence. Matthew argues for a shift toward introspection and self-inquiry in a society grappling with existential challenges, emphasizing that confronting mortality can foster a deeper sense of meaning in our lives. New Substack! Follow my personal writings and EARLY ACCESS episodes here: https://curtjaimungal.substack.com LINKED MENTIONED: •⁠ ⁠Matthew's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@Footnotes2Plato •⁠ ⁠Matthew's Diagram of Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Z1zY39EKbs •⁠ ⁠Matthew's talk with John Vervaeke: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15akhXGHwzo •⁠ ⁠Critique of Pure Reason (book): https://www.amazon.com/Critique-Pure-Reason-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140447474 •⁠ ⁠Critique of Judgement (book): https://www.amazon.com/Critique-Judgement-Immanuel-Kant/dp/1545245673/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= •⁠ ⁠The Phenomenology of Spirit (book): https://www.amazon.com/Georg-Wilhelm-Friedrich-Hegel-Phenomenology/dp/1108730086 •⁠ ⁠1919 Eclipse (paper): https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/epdf/10.1098/rsnr.2020.0040 •⁠ ⁠Einstein/Bergson debate (article): https://www.faena.com/aleph/einstein-vs-bergson-the-struggle-for-time •⁠ ⁠The Principle of Relativity (book): https://www.amazon.com/Principle-Relativity-Alfred-North-Whitehead/dp/1602062188 •⁠ ⁠John Vervaeke's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@johnvervaeke •⁠ ⁠John Vervaeke on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVj1KYGyesI •⁠ ⁠Philip Goff on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmaIBxkqcT4 •⁠ ⁠Sabine Hossenfelder on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3y-Z0pgupg •⁠ ⁠Donald Hoffman on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmieNQH7Q4w •⁠ ⁠Karl Friston on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk4NZorRjCo •⁠ ⁠Iain McGilchrist on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9sBKCd2HD0 •⁠ ⁠Thomas Campbell on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kko-hVA-8IU •⁠ ⁠Noam Chomsky on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch? •⁠ ⁠v=3lcDT_-3v2k&list=PLZ7ikzmc6zlORiRfcaQe8ZdxKxF-e2BCY&index=3 •⁠ ⁠Michael Levin on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8iFtaltX-s&list=PLZ7ikzmc6zlN6E8KrxcYCWQIHg2tfkqvR&index=39 •⁠ ⁠Roger Penrose on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGm505TFMbU&list=PLZ7ikzmc6zlN6E8KrxcYCWQIHg2tfkqvR&index=16 •⁠ ⁠Neil Turok's lecture on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gwhqmPqRl4&list=PLZ7ikzmc6zlN6E8KrxcYCWQIHg2tfkqvR&index=35 •⁠ ⁠TOE's Consciousness Iceberg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR4cpn8m9i0&ab_channel=TheoriesofEverythingwithCurtJaimungal •⁠ ⁠TOE's String Theory Iceberg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4PdPnQuwjY Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 1:35 The Roots of Process Philosophy 4:47 The Rise of Nominalism 8:26 The Evolution of Substance 11:02 Descartes and the Dualist Divide 21:34 Kant's Copernican Revolution 33:08 The Nature of Knowledge 37:42 Hegel's Dialectic Unfolds 46:18 Schelling's Panpsychism 56:50 Whitehead's Organic Realism 1:22:17 The Bifurcation of Nature 1:31:38 The Emergence of Consciousness 1:38:37 The Nature of Self-Organization 1:53:40 Perspectives on Actuality and Potentiality 2:11:35 The Role of God in Process Philosophy 2:23:55 The Human Experience and Self-Inquiry 2:40:34 Reflections on Mortality and Meaning 2:47:44 The Shift from Substance to Process 2:58:02 Embracing Interconnectedness and Consciousness 3:00:49 The Call for Inner Exploration #science #philosophy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Christopher Satoor is a doctoral candidate (ABD) in the Department of Humanities at York University. His research focuses on Classical German philosophy of the 18th and 19th-century and the German idealist philosophies of Kant and Fichte, with an extra special concentration on Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling. Site: https://philpeople.org/profiles/christopher-satoor Satoor's podcast: https://www.youtube.com/ @TheYoungIdealist  ---Become part of the Hermitix community:Hermitix Twitter - / hermitixpodcast Support Hermitix:Patreon - / hermitix Donations: - https://www.paypal.me/hermitixpodHermitix Merchandise - http://teespring.com/stores/hermitix-2Bitcoin Donation Address: 3LAGEKBXEuE2pgc4oubExGTWtrKPuXDDLKEthereum Donation Address: 0x31e2a4a31B8563B8d238eC086daE9B75a00D9E74

✨ Subscribe to the Green Pill Podcast ✨ https://pod.link/1609313639

Du bist noch auf der Suche nach einem passenden Geschenk für deine Lieben oder möchtest dir selbst eine Auszeit gönnen über die Feiertage? Mit ihren 10 Buchempfehlungen setzen Karla und Günter dieser unruhigen Zeit etwas Entspannung entgegen. Folgende 10 Bücher machen Mut und gute Laune: Ronja von Wurmb-Seibel „Zusammen“ (Kösel): Jeder dritte Deutsche fühlt sich heute einsam. Wie wir wieder mehr in Verbindung treten und Mut fürs Miteinander finden, verrät dieser Ratgeber mit vielen Lösungen und Übungen. Britta Teckentrup „Mutig” (Prestel): Das außergewöhnlich schön illustrierte Kinderbuch erzählt davon, dass Angst und Mut zusammengehören. Ein Mädchen fürchtet sich vor einem Bären. Doch als es sich ihm nähert, wird der Bär sein Begleiter und schließlich sein Freund. Melanie Raabe „Der längste Schlaf“ (btb): Wissenschaftlerin Mara forscht über den Schlaf und hat selbst quälende Träume. Überraschend erbt sie ein Herrenhaus, das auf seltsame Weise mit ihren Träumen in Verbindung steht. Hoher Mystik-Grusel-Faktor! Curtis Sittenfeld „Romantic Comedy“ (Dumont): Comedy-Autorin Sally macht sich in ihren Sketches über Machtdynamiken in Beziehungen lustig. Bis Popstar Noah in ihr Leben tritt. Eine funkelnde Mediensatire und köstliche Romantic Comedy, die einfach gute Laune bringt. Juan Gómez-Jurado und Bárbara Montes „Amanda Black“ (cbj): Die 12-jährige Amanda erfährt, dass sie das letzte Mitglied eines Geheimbundes und einer Schatzjäger-Familie ist. Ihre Mission: Die Menschheit vor gefährlicher Magie beschützen. Klischeefrei, cool und spannend für Kinder ab 9 Jahren. Jan-Philipp Sendker „Akikos stilles Glück“ (Blessing): Die 29-jährige Akiko lebt als Single in Tokio. Eines Abends trifft sie ihre erste Liebe wieder. Kento lebt zurückgezogen als Hikikomori, trotzdem hilft er ihr, mit der Tragik ihres Lebens umzugehen. Andrea Wulf „Fabelhafte Rebellen“ (C.Bertelsmann): Nach der französischen Revolution ist der Absolutismus wieder zurück. Ein turbulenter Freundeskreis rund um Goethe, Schiller, Schelling und Hegel wagt es dennoch, radikale Ideen zu verfechten. Inspirierende und unterhaltsame deutsche Geistesgeschichte. Rosalind Brown „Übung“ (Blessing): Oxford-Studentin Annabell arbeitet einen Tag lang an einem Essay über Shakespeares Sonette, schweift jedoch immer wieder ab. Das Buch gewährt à la Virginia Woolf einen präzisen Einblick in ihr Innenleben. Alexandra Schlüter „Winterreise“ (Prestel): Eine wunderschön bebilderte Reise durch das winterliche Deutschland. Mit vielen Rezepten, Literaturtipps, Anekdoten und einem liebevollen Blick auf Menschen und Traditionen. Sara Klatt „Das Land, das ich dir zeigen will“ (Penguin): Eine junge Frau trampt durch Israel und begegnet auf ihrer Reise Menschen, die so vielschichtig sind wie das Land selbst. Ein verblüffender Roman über das moderne und das vergangene Israel, der für Frieden und Verständigung wirbt. +++ Viel Spaß mit dieser Folge. Wir freuen uns auf euer Feedback an podcast@penguinrandomhouse.de! +++ Unsere allgemeinen Datenschutzrichtlinien finden Sie unter https://art19.com/privacy. Die Datenschutzrichtlinien für Kalifornien sind unter https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info abrufbar.

Indian Philosophy and Yoga in Germany by Owen Ware (Routledge, 2024) takes the reader on a tour through the reception of Yoga philosophies in nineteenth-century German and the early twentieth century. European luminaries like Schlegel, Hegel, von Günderrode, Schelling, Humbolt, and Müller all engaged with works like the Bhagavad Gītā and Yogā Sūtras, though in very different ways, some reading yogic thought as entailing a threatening nihilism, others lauding it as superlatively philosophical. Ware shows how their responses to Indian thought illuminates our understanding of post-Kantian philosophy and its anxieties over pantheism indebted to Spinoza. He concludes with two chapters on a range of Indian scholars from Swami Vivekananda to K. C. Bhattacharyya, exploring how their work engages with this history of European readings, grappling with themes of freedom, morality, and devotion in yoga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Indian Philosophy and Yoga in Germany by Owen Ware (Routledge, 2024) takes the reader on a tour through the reception of Yoga philosophies in nineteenth-century German and the early twentieth century. European luminaries like Schlegel, Hegel, von Günderrode, Schelling, Humbolt, and Müller all engaged with works like the Bhagavad Gītā and Yogā Sūtras, though in very different ways, some reading yogic thought as entailing a threatening nihilism, others lauding it as superlatively philosophical. Ware shows how their responses to Indian thought illuminates our understanding of post-Kantian philosophy and its anxieties over pantheism indebted to Spinoza. He concludes with two chapters on a range of Indian scholars from Swami Vivekananda to K. C. Bhattacharyya, exploring how their work engages with this history of European readings, grappling with themes of freedom, morality, and devotion in yoga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/philosophy

Indian Philosophy and Yoga in Germany by Owen Ware (Routledge, 2024) takes the reader on a tour through the reception of Yoga philosophies in nineteenth-century German and the early twentieth century. European luminaries like Schlegel, Hegel, von Günderrode, Schelling, Humbolt, and Müller all engaged with works like the Bhagavad Gītā and Yogā Sūtras, though in very different ways, some reading yogic thought as entailing a threatening nihilism, others lauding it as superlatively philosophical. Ware shows how their responses to Indian thought illuminates our understanding of post-Kantian philosophy and its anxieties over pantheism indebted to Spinoza. He concludes with two chapters on a range of Indian scholars from Swami Vivekananda to K. C. Bhattacharyya, exploring how their work engages with this history of European readings, grappling with themes of freedom, morality, and devotion in yoga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Indian Philosophy and Yoga in Germany by Owen Ware (Routledge, 2024) takes the reader on a tour through the reception of Yoga philosophies in nineteenth-century German and the early twentieth century. European luminaries like Schlegel, Hegel, von Günderrode, Schelling, Humbolt, and Müller all engaged with works like the Bhagavad Gītā and Yogā Sūtras, though in very different ways, some reading yogic thought as entailing a threatening nihilism, others lauding it as superlatively philosophical. Ware shows how their responses to Indian thought illuminates our understanding of post-Kantian philosophy and its anxieties over pantheism indebted to Spinoza. He concludes with two chapters on a range of Indian scholars from Swami Vivekananda to K. C. Bhattacharyya, exploring how their work engages with this history of European readings, grappling with themes of freedom, morality, and devotion in yoga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Indian Philosophy and Yoga in Germany by Owen Ware (Routledge, 2024) takes the reader on a tour through the reception of Yoga philosophies in nineteenth-century German and the early twentieth century. European luminaries like Schlegel, Hegel, von Günderrode, Schelling, Humbolt, and Müller all engaged with works like the Bhagavad Gītā and Yogā Sūtras, though in very different ways, some reading yogic thought as entailing a threatening nihilism, others lauding it as superlatively philosophical. Ware shows how their responses to Indian thought illuminates our understanding of post-Kantian philosophy and its anxieties over pantheism indebted to Spinoza. He concludes with two chapters on a range of Indian scholars from Swami Vivekananda to K. C. Bhattacharyya, exploring how their work engages with this history of European readings, grappling with themes of freedom, morality, and devotion in yoga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Indian Philosophy and Yoga in Germany by Owen Ware (Routledge, 2024) takes the reader on a tour through the reception of Yoga philosophies in nineteenth-century German and the early twentieth century. European luminaries like Schlegel, Hegel, von Günderrode, Schelling, Humbolt, and Müller all engaged with works like the Bhagavad Gītā and Yogā Sūtras, though in very different ways, some reading yogic thought as entailing a threatening nihilism, others lauding it as superlatively philosophical. Ware shows how their responses to Indian thought illuminates our understanding of post-Kantian philosophy and its anxieties over pantheism indebted to Spinoza. He concludes with two chapters on a range of Indian scholars from Swami Vivekananda to K. C. Bhattacharyya, exploring how their work engages with this history of European readings, grappling with themes of freedom, morality, and devotion in yoga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/indian-religions

Indian Philosophy and Yoga in Germany by Owen Ware (Routledge, 2024) takes the reader on a tour through the reception of Yoga philosophies in nineteenth-century German and the early twentieth century. European luminaries like Schlegel, Hegel, von Günderrode, Schelling, Humbolt, and Müller all engaged with works like the Bhagavad Gītā and Yogā Sūtras, though in very different ways, some reading yogic thought as entailing a threatening nihilism, others lauding it as superlatively philosophical. Ware shows how their responses to Indian thought illuminates our understanding of post-Kantian philosophy and its anxieties over pantheism indebted to Spinoza. He concludes with two chapters on a range of Indian scholars from Swami Vivekananda to K. C. Bhattacharyya, exploring how their work engages with this history of European readings, grappling with themes of freedom, morality, and devotion in yoga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/religion

Indian Philosophy and Yoga in Germany by Owen Ware (Routledge, 2024) takes the reader on a tour through the reception of Yoga philosophies in nineteenth-century German and the early twentieth century. European luminaries like Schlegel, Hegel, von Günderrode, Schelling, Humbolt, and Müller all engaged with works like the Bhagavad Gītā and Yogā Sūtras, though in very different ways, some reading yogic thought as entailing a threatening nihilism, others lauding it as superlatively philosophical. Ware shows how their responses to Indian thought illuminates our understanding of post-Kantian philosophy and its anxieties over pantheism indebted to Spinoza. He concludes with two chapters on a range of Indian scholars from Swami Vivekananda to K. C. Bhattacharyya, exploring how their work engages with this history of European readings, grappling with themes of freedom, morality, and devotion in yoga. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

Bei Spritzen und Diabetes dachte man früher sofort an Insulin. Inzwischen aber sind die sog. "Abnehmspritzen" in aller Munde. Was ist da dran - für Diabetiker, gegen Alzheimer, Sucht oder Herzinfarkt? Mit Prof. Jörg Schelling.

In this podcast we meet Matt Segall, core faculty in the Philosophy, Cosmology and Consciousness Program at CIIS. We discuss the need for new methods of research beyond the limits of siloed disciplines producing interdisciplinary knowledge. In research, Matt speaks of the importance of disclosing one's own metaphysical groundings and epistemological assumptions in order to build frameworks of transdisciplinary engagement, which are spaces of discovery, creation and the invention of new concepts and languages. We also speak about Carl Jung, Rudolf Steiner relations to transdisciplinary pedagogy and end by discussing Matt's new book Crossing the Threshold: Etheric Imagination in the Post-Kantian Process Philosophy of Schelling and Whitehead. Matthew D. Segall, Ph.D, is a transdisciplinary researcher who teaches courses applying process-relational philosophy across various disciplines, including religious studies, philosophy of nature, philosophy of mind, and social and political theory. He has published on these and a wide range of other topics, including German idealism, the philosophy of time, psychedelics, theoretical biology, architecture, and media theory. Publications: Crossing the Threshold: Etheric Imagination in the Post-Kantian Process Philosophy of Schelling and Whitehead (2023) Physics of the World-Soul: Whitehead's Adventure in Cosmology (2021) The EWP Podcast credits: East-West Psychology Podcast Website Connect with EWP: Website • Youtube • Facebook Hosted by Stephen Julich (EWP Core Faculty) and Jonathan Kay (PhD candidate) Produced by: Stephen Julich and Jonathan Kay Edited and Mixed by: Jonathan Kay Introduction music: Mosaic, by Monsoon on the album Mandala Music at the end of the episode: Expansion, on the album Experiments of Truth, by Kayos Theory Introduction Voiceover: Roche Wadehra Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

We welcome philosopher Christopher Satoor for a discussion on the philosophy of Schelling, the great German idealist. We will focus our conversation on two Marxist critiques of Schelling in Lukács' The Destruction of Reason, to Engels' critique of Schelling from his notes on attending Schelling's lectures as a younger student. Christopher Satoor is an expert in German idealism and a strident Schellingian, so this conversation is sure to be of interest! Get access to the readings for this discussion and seminar with Dr. Satoor by joining our Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/posts/schelling-with-109208386). 

Antonella Moscati"L'intruso"Jean-Paul NancyA cura di Valeria PiazzaCronopio Edizioniwww.cronopio.itLa questione non è che mi abbiano aperto, spalancato, per sostituirmi il cuore, ma che questa apertura non può essere richiusa. (Del resto ogni radiografia lo mostra, lo sterno è ricucito con pezzi di filo di ferro ritorti). Io sono aperto chiuso. C'è in me un'apertura attraverso la quale passa un flusso incessante di estraneità: i farmaci immunodepressori e gli altri che servono a combattere alcuni effetti detti secondari, le conseguenze inevitabili (come il deterioramento dei reni), i ripetuti controlli, tutta l'esistenza posta su un nuovo piano, trascinata da un luogo all'altro. La vita scannerizzata e riportata su molteplici registri ciascuno dei quali iscrive altre possibilità di morte.Sono dunque io stesso che divengo il mio intruso, in tutti questi modi che si accumulano e si oppongono.Antonella Moscati è nata a Napoli e vive a Ostuni. Ha scritto su Kant, Schelling, Freud, Benjamin, Arendt e Nancy e tradotto dal tedesco e dal francese testi di filosofia contemporanea. Fra i suoi libri: Deliri (nottetempo, 2009), Una casa (nottetempo, 2015), Pathologies (Arléa, 2020). Per Quodlibet ha pubblicato Il canale di Otranto (2007), Ellen West. Una vita indegna di essere vissuta (2022), Una quasi eternità (2022) e Patologie (2024).IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarewww.ilpostodelleparole.itDiventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.

مفهوم بازدارندگی در سال‌های گذشته یکی از پرتکرارترین واژگان فضای سیاست خارجی و امنیت ملی ایران بوده است. برخی معتقدند بدون رسیدن به بمب اتم، بازدارندگی ایران ناقص است و برخی بمب اتم را موثر نمیدانند. حق با کدام گروه است؟ بازدارندگی در چه مواردی موفق می‌شود و چه کارهایی باید انجام داد تا یک بازدارندگی موفق شود؟آیا ایران و اسرائیل وارد یک جنگ بزرگ می‌شوند؟این‌ها سوالاتی هستند که در این اپیزود سعی کردم به آن‌ها پاسخ دهم.منابع اپیزودMazarr, Michael J., Understanding Deterrence. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2018. https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE295.html.Mazarr, Michael J., Arthur Chan, Alyssa Demus, Bryan Frederick, Alireza Nader, Stephanie Pezard, Julia A. Thompson, and Elina Treyger, What Deters and Why: Exploring Requirements for Effective Deterrence of Interstate Aggression. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2018. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2451.html. Also available in print form.Paul, T. V., Morgan, P. M., & Wirtz, J. J. (2009). Complex deterrence: Strategy in the Global Age.SCHELLING, T. C. (1966). Arms and Influence. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt5vm52sExpert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? REV-Revised. Princeton University Press, 2005. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1pk86s8. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode we explore the correct context for understanding Kant's relation to the historical period known as “the Enlightenment” or “the Age of Reason.” On the one hand, Kant's Critique of Pure Reason may be understood as “critiquing reason to make room for faith.” On the other hand, the Method of Kant's Transcendental Philosophy reveals Spirit as the condition for the possibility of the unity of Mind and Body. We'll understand these insights by discussing what has been called “the Homeric Contest” to complete Kant's “System of Transcendental Philosophy.” The contest refers to the competition that may be witnessed in the writings of Fichte, Novalis, Hölderlin, Schelling, Schopenhauer, and Hegel. Understanding this historical contextualization of Kant's philosophy makes it much easier to see that contemporary Postmodern criticisms of Kant's philosophy are not actually criticisms of Kant's philosophy. Rather, they are criticisms of Descartes' philosophy. Thus, Kant's philosophy is not the problem; Kant's philosophy is the solution to the problem(s) with Descartes' philosophy. . Please post your questions or comments on The Philosophemes YouTube Channel. Accessible through this Linktree link: https://linktr.ee/philosophemes . Amazon Author Page: https://amzn.to/4cM6nzf . The Existentialism Book: http://shepherd.com/book/what-is-existentialism-vol-i . Online Courses (Gumroad) Coming Soon! . Podcast Page: https://evergreenpodcasts.com/the-philosophemes-podcast #philosophy, #existentialism, #FrankScalambrino, #phenomenology, #psychology, #historyofphilosophy, #historyofpsychology, #Plato, #Heidegger, #philosophypodcast . Some links may be “affiliate links,” which means I may I receive a small commission from your purchase through these links. This helps to support the channel. Thank you. Editorial, educational, and fair use of images. © 2024, Frank Scalambrino, Ph.D. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Enroll for Mikey's seminar here https://theoryunderground.com/product/freemikey Enroll for Mikey's Intro to Zizek starting in September: https://theoryunderground.com/product/zizek-1/    GET INVOLVED or SUPPORT  Join live sessions and unlock past courses and forums on the TU Discord by becoming a member via the monthly subscription! It's the hands-down best way to get the most out of the content if you are excited to learn the field and become a thinker in the milieu: https://theoryunderground.com/products/tu-subscription-tiers Pledge support to the production of the free content on YouTube and Podcast https://www.patreon.com/TheoryUnderground Fund the publishing work via the TU Substack, where original works by the TU writers is featured alongside original works by Slavoj Zizek, Todd McGowan, Chris Cutrone, Nina Power, Alenka Zupancic, et al. https://theoryunderground.substack.com/ ABOUT Theory Underground is a research, publishing, and lecture institute. TU exists to develop the concept of timenergy in the context of critical social theory (CST). CST is the umbrella over critical media theory (CMT), critical doxology and timenergy (CDT), critique of libidinal economy (CLE), critique of political economy (CPE), critique of gender and sex (CGS), and critique of psychiatry and therapism (CPT), critique of science and religion (CSR), and many more. To get basically situated in this field you will have to know a handful of important figures from a bunch of areas of the humanities and social sciences. That would be a lot of work for you if not for the fact that Dave, Ann, and Mikey are consolidating hundreds of thousands of hours of effort into a pirate TV-radio-press that goes on tours and throws conferences and shit like that… It's a crazyfun experiment, and you can enjoy a ton of the content here for free.    Get TU books at a discount: https://theoryunderground.com/publications   CREDITS / LINKS Missed a course at Theory Underground? Wrong! Courses at Theory Underground are available after the fact on demand via the membership. https://theoryunderground.com/courses   If you want to help TU in a totally gratuitous way, or support, here is a way to buy something concrete and immediately useful https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/2MAWFYUJQIM58?   Buy Dave and Ann a coffee date: https://www.venmo.com/u/Theorypleeb https://paypal.me/theorypleeb   If Theory Underground has helped you see that text-to-speech technologies are a useful way of supplementing one's reading while living a busy life, if you want to be able to listen to PDFs for yourself, then Speechify is recommended. Use the link below and Theory Underground gets credit! https://share.speechify.com/mzwBHEB  Follow Theory Underground on Duolingo: https://invite.duolingo.com/BDHTZTB5CWWKTP747NSNMAOYEI  See Theory Underground memes and get occasional updates or thoughts via the Instagram : https://www.instagram.com/theory_underground   MUSIC CREDITS Logo sequence music by https://olliebeanz.com/music https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode Mike Chino, Demigods https://youtu.be/M6wruxDngOk

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: AIS terminology proposal: standardize terms for probability ranges, published by Egg Syntax on August 30, 2024 on The AI Alignment Forum. Summary: The AI safety research community should adopt standardized terms for probability ranges, especially in public-facing communication and especially when discussing risk estimates. The terms used by the IPCC are a reasonable default. Science communication is notoriously hard. It's hard for a lot of reasons, but one is that laypeople aren't used to thinking in numerical probabilities or probability ranges. One field that's had to deal with this more than most is climatology; climate change has been rather controversial, and a non-trivial aspect of that has been lay confusion about what climatologists are actually saying[1]. As a result, the well-known climate assessment reports from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have, since the 1990s, used explicitly defined terms for probability ranges[2]: (see below for full figure[3]) Like climatology, AI safety research has become a topic of controversy. In both cases, the controversy includes a mix of genuine scientific disagreement, good-faith confusion, and bad-faith opposition. Scientific disagreement comes from people who can deal with numerical probability ranges. Those who are arguing in bad faith from ulterior motives generally don't care about factual details. But I suspect that the large majority of those who disagree, especially laypeople, are coming from a place of genuine, good-faith confusion. For those people, anything we as practitioners can do to communicate more clearly is quite valuable. Also like climatology, AI safety research, especially assessments of risk, fundamentally involves communicating about probabilities and probability ranges. Therefore I propose that the AIS community follow climatologists in adopting standard terms for probability ranges, especially in position papers and public-facing communication. In less formal and less public-facing contexts, using standard terminology still adds some value but is less important; in sufficiently informal contexts it's probably not worth the hassle of looking up the standard terminology. Of course, in many cases it's better to just give the actual numerical range! But especially in public-facing communication it can be more natural to use natural language terms, and in fact this is already often done. I'm only proposing that when we do use natural language terms for probability ranges, we use them in a consistent and interpretable way (feel free to link to this post as a reference for interpretation, or point to the climatology papers cited below[2]). Should the AIS community use the same terms? That's a slightly harder question. The obvious first-pass answer is 'yes'; it's a natural Schelling point, and terminological consistency across fields is generally preferable when practically possible. The IPCC terms also have the significant advantage of being battle-tested; they've been used over a thirty-year period in a highly controversial field, and terms have been refined when they were found to be insufficiently clear. The strongest argument I see against using the same terms is that the AIS community sometimes needs to deal with more extreme (high or low) risk estimates than these. If we use 'virtually certain' to mean 99 - 100%, what terms can we use for 99.9 - 100.0%, or 99.99 - 100.00%? On the other hand, plausibly once we're dealing with such extreme risk estimates, it's increasingly important to communicate them with actual numeric ranges. My initial proposal is to adopt the IPCC terms, but I'm very open to feedback, and if someone has an argument I find compelling (or which gets strong agreement in votes) for a different or extended set of terms, I'll add it to the proposal. If no su...

Lungenentzündung, Augeninfektion oder Scharlach - ohne Antibiotika wären wir bis heute machtlos gegen Bakterien. Doch viele Erreger sind inzwischen resistent. Prof. Jörg Schelling über Einsatz von Antibiotika und Alternativen.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Twitter thread on AI safety evals, published by Richard Ngo on July 31, 2024 on LessWrong. Epistemic status: raising concerns, rather than stating confident conclusions. I'm worried that a lot of work on AI safety evals matches the pattern of "Something must be done. This is something. Therefore this must be done." Or, to put it another way: I judge eval ideas on 4 criteria, and I often see proposals which fail all 4. The criteria: 1. Possible to measure with scientific rigor. Some things can be easily studied in a lab; others are entangled with a lot of real-world complexity. If you predict the latter (e.g. a model's economic or scientific impact) based on model-level evals, your results will often be BS. (This is why I dislike the term "transformative AI", by the way. Whether an AI has transformative effects on society will depend hugely on what the society is like, how the AI is deployed, etc. And that's a constantly moving target! So TAI a terrible thing to try to forecast.) Another angle on "scientific rigor": you're trying to make it obvious to onlookers that you couldn't have designed the eval to get your preferred results. This means making the eval as simple as possible: each arbitrary choice adds another avenue for p-hacking, and they add up fast. (Paraphrasing a different thread): I think of AI risk forecasts as basically guesses, and I dislike attempts to make them sound objective (e.g. many OpenPhil worldview investigations). There are always so many free parameters that you can get basically any result you want. And so, in practice, they often play the role of laundering vibes into credible-sounding headline numbers. I'm worried that AI safety evals will fall into the same trap. (I give Eliezer a lot of credit for making roughly this criticism of Ajeya's bio-anchors report. I think his critique has basically been proven right by how much people have updated away from 30-year timelines since then.) 2. Provides signal across scales. Evals are often designed around a binary threshold (e.g. the Turing Test). But this restricts the impact of the eval to a narrow time window around hitting it. Much better if we can measure (and extrapolate) orders-of-magnitude improvements. 3. Focuses on clearly worrying capabilities. Evals for hacking, deception, etc track widespread concerns. By contrast, evals for things like automated ML R&D are only worrying for people who already believe in AI xrisk. And even they don't think it's necessary for risk. 4. Motivates useful responses. Safety evals are for creating clear Schelling points at which action will be taken. But if you don't know what actions your evals should catalyze, it's often more valuable to focus on fleshing that out. Often nobody else will! In fact, I expect that things like model releases, demos, warning shots, etc, will by default be much better drivers of action than evals. Evals can still be valuable, but you should have some justification for why yours will actually matter, to avoid traps like the ones above. Ideally that justification would focus either on generating insight or being persuasive; optimizing for both at once seems like a good way to get neither. Lastly: even if you have a good eval idea, actually implementing it well can be very challenging Building evals is scientific research; and so we should expect eval quality to be heavy-tailed, like most other science. I worry that the fact that evals are an unusually easy type of research to get started with sometimes obscures this fact. Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Twitter thread on politics of AI safety, published by Richard Ngo on July 31, 2024 on LessWrong. Some thoughts about the politics of AI safety, copied over (with slight modifications) from my recent twitter thread: Risks that seem speculative today will become common sense as AI advances. The pros and cons of different safety strategies will also become much clearer over time. So our main job now is to empower future common-sense decision-making. Understanding model cognition and behavior is crucial for making good decisions. But equally important is ensuring that key institutions are able to actually process that knowledge. Institutions can lock in arbitrarily crazy beliefs via preference falsification. When someone contradicts the party line, even people who agree face pressure to condemn them. We saw this with the Democrats hiding evidence of Biden's mental decline. It's also a key reason why dictators can retain power even after almost nobody truly supports them. I worry that DC has already locked in an anti-China stance, which could persist even if most individuals change their minds. We're also trending towards Dems and Republicans polarizing on the safety/accelerationism axis. This polarization is hard to fight directly. But there will be an increasing number of "holy shit" moments that serve as Schelling points to break existing consensus. It will be very high-leverage to have common-sense bipartisan frameworks and proposals ready for those moments. Perhaps the most crucial desideratum for these proposals is that they're robust to the inevitable scramble for power that will follow those "holy shit" movements. I don't know how to achieve that, but one important factor is: will AI tools and assistants help or hurt? E.g. truth-motivated AI could help break preference falsification. But conversely, centralized control of AIs used in govts could make it easier to maintain a single narrative. This problem of "governance with AI" (as opposed to governance *of* AI) seems very important! Designing principles for integrating AI into human governments feels analogous in historical scope to writing the US constitution. One bottleneck in making progress on that: few insiders disclose how NatSec decisions are really made (though Daniel Ellsberg's books are a notable exception). So I expect that understanding this better will be a big focus of mine going forward. Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org

Dynamic Repetition: History and Messianism in Modern Jewish Thought (Brandeis UP, 2022) proposes a new understanding of modern Jewish theories of messianism across the disciplines of history, theology, and philosophy. The book explores how ideals of repetition, return, and the cyclical occasioned a new messianic impulse across an important swath of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century German Jewish thought. To grasp the complexities of Jewish messianism in modernity, the book focuses on diverse notions of “dynamic repetition” in the works of Franz Rosenzweig, Walter Benjamin, Franz Kafka, and Sigmund Freud, and their interrelations with basic trajectories of twentieth-century philosophy and critical thought. Gilad Sharvit is an assistant professor in the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Towson University. A scholar of modern Jewish thought, Sharvit's interests lie in Jewish philosophy, German-Jewish literature and culture, German and continental philosophy, psychoanalysis and critical theory. He completed his PhD studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the Philosophy Department and later accepted a Diller Post-Doctoral Fellowship at the Center for Jewish Studies at University of California, Berkeley (2014-16) and was a Townsend Fellow at the Townsend Center for the Humanities at University of California, Berkeley (2016-17). In 2017-18, Professor Sharvit was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Koebner Minerva Center for German History (Hebrew University) and at Tel Aviv University (Minerva Center for German History and School of Philosophy). Professor Sharvit is the author of Therapeutics and Salvation: Freud and Schelling on Freedom (Magnes Press) (in Hebrew) and co-editor and contributing author of the volumes Freud and Monotheism: The Violent Origins of Religion with Karen Feldman (Fordham University Press, 2018) and Canonization and Alterity: Heresy in Jewish History, Thought, and Literature with Willi Goetschel (De Gruyter, 2020). Amir Engel is a professor at the German Department of the Hebrew University and currently also a visiting professor for the history and present of Jewish-Christian relations at the Theological Faculty of the Humboldt University in Berlin. He studied philosophy, literature and cultural studies at the Hebrew University and earned his doctorate in German Studies at Stanford University, California. He then taught and researched at the Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main. His research focuses on religion, politics, literature, and the relationships between these three areas. His main topics include German-Jewish Romanticism and German-Jewish literature and culture in the post-war period. His first book, Gershom Scholem: An Intellectual Biography, was published in 2017, and he is currently finalizing his second book manuscript, tentatively titled The Politics of Spirituality: German, Jews and Christian 1900 - 1942 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Dynamic Repetition: History and Messianism in Modern Jewish Thought (Brandeis UP, 2022) proposes a new understanding of modern Jewish theories of messianism across the disciplines of history, theology, and philosophy. The book explores how ideals of repetition, return, and the cyclical occasioned a new messianic impulse across an important swath of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century German Jewish thought. To grasp the complexities of Jewish messianism in modernity, the book focuses on diverse notions of “dynamic repetition” in the works of Franz Rosenzweig, Walter Benjamin, Franz Kafka, and Sigmund Freud, and their interrelations with basic trajectories of twentieth-century philosophy and critical thought. Gilad Sharvit is an assistant professor in the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Towson University. A scholar of modern Jewish thought, Sharvit's interests lie in Jewish philosophy, German-Jewish literature and culture, German and continental philosophy, psychoanalysis and critical theory. He completed his PhD studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the Philosophy Department and later accepted a Diller Post-Doctoral Fellowship at the Center for Jewish Studies at University of California, Berkeley (2014-16) and was a Townsend Fellow at the Townsend Center for the Humanities at University of California, Berkeley (2016-17). In 2017-18, Professor Sharvit was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Koebner Minerva Center for German History (Hebrew University) and at Tel Aviv University (Minerva Center for German History and School of Philosophy). Professor Sharvit is the author of Therapeutics and Salvation: Freud and Schelling on Freedom (Magnes Press) (in Hebrew) and co-editor and contributing author of the volumes Freud and Monotheism: The Violent Origins of Religion with Karen Feldman (Fordham University Press, 2018) and Canonization and Alterity: Heresy in Jewish History, Thought, and Literature with Willi Goetschel (De Gruyter, 2020). Amir Engel is a professor at the German Department of the Hebrew University and currently also a visiting professor for the history and present of Jewish-Christian relations at the Theological Faculty of the Humboldt University in Berlin. He studied philosophy, literature and cultural studies at the Hebrew University and earned his doctorate in German Studies at Stanford University, California. He then taught and researched at the Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main. His research focuses on religion, politics, literature, and the relationships between these three areas. His main topics include German-Jewish Romanticism and German-Jewish literature and culture in the post-war period. His first book, Gershom Scholem: An Intellectual Biography, was published in 2017, and he is currently finalizing his second book manuscript, tentatively titled The Politics of Spirituality: German, Jews and Christian 1900 - 1942 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Dynamic Repetition: History and Messianism in Modern Jewish Thought (Brandeis UP, 2022) proposes a new understanding of modern Jewish theories of messianism across the disciplines of history, theology, and philosophy. The book explores how ideals of repetition, return, and the cyclical occasioned a new messianic impulse across an important swath of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century German Jewish thought. To grasp the complexities of Jewish messianism in modernity, the book focuses on diverse notions of “dynamic repetition” in the works of Franz Rosenzweig, Walter Benjamin, Franz Kafka, and Sigmund Freud, and their interrelations with basic trajectories of twentieth-century philosophy and critical thought. Gilad Sharvit is an assistant professor in the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Towson University. A scholar of modern Jewish thought, Sharvit's interests lie in Jewish philosophy, German-Jewish literature and culture, German and continental philosophy, psychoanalysis and critical theory. He completed his PhD studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the Philosophy Department and later accepted a Diller Post-Doctoral Fellowship at the Center for Jewish Studies at University of California, Berkeley (2014-16) and was a Townsend Fellow at the Townsend Center for the Humanities at University of California, Berkeley (2016-17). In 2017-18, Professor Sharvit was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Koebner Minerva Center for German History (Hebrew University) and at Tel Aviv University (Minerva Center for German History and School of Philosophy). Professor Sharvit is the author of Therapeutics and Salvation: Freud and Schelling on Freedom (Magnes Press) (in Hebrew) and co-editor and contributing author of the volumes Freud and Monotheism: The Violent Origins of Religion with Karen Feldman (Fordham University Press, 2018) and Canonization and Alterity: Heresy in Jewish History, Thought, and Literature with Willi Goetschel (De Gruyter, 2020). Amir Engel is a professor at the German Department of the Hebrew University and currently also a visiting professor for the history and present of Jewish-Christian relations at the Theological Faculty of the Humboldt University in Berlin. He studied philosophy, literature and cultural studies at the Hebrew University and earned his doctorate in German Studies at Stanford University, California. He then taught and researched at the Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main. His research focuses on religion, politics, literature, and the relationships between these three areas. His main topics include German-Jewish Romanticism and German-Jewish literature and culture in the post-war period. His first book, Gershom Scholem: An Intellectual Biography, was published in 2017, and he is currently finalizing his second book manuscript, tentatively titled The Politics of Spirituality: German, Jews and Christian 1900 - 1942 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Dynamic Repetition: History and Messianism in Modern Jewish Thought (Brandeis UP, 2022) proposes a new understanding of modern Jewish theories of messianism across the disciplines of history, theology, and philosophy. The book explores how ideals of repetition, return, and the cyclical occasioned a new messianic impulse across an important swath of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century German Jewish thought. To grasp the complexities of Jewish messianism in modernity, the book focuses on diverse notions of “dynamic repetition” in the works of Franz Rosenzweig, Walter Benjamin, Franz Kafka, and Sigmund Freud, and their interrelations with basic trajectories of twentieth-century philosophy and critical thought. Gilad Sharvit is an assistant professor in the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Towson University. A scholar of modern Jewish thought, Sharvit's interests lie in Jewish philosophy, German-Jewish literature and culture, German and continental philosophy, psychoanalysis and critical theory. He completed his PhD studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the Philosophy Department and later accepted a Diller Post-Doctoral Fellowship at the Center for Jewish Studies at University of California, Berkeley (2014-16) and was a Townsend Fellow at the Townsend Center for the Humanities at University of California, Berkeley (2016-17). In 2017-18, Professor Sharvit was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Koebner Minerva Center for German History (Hebrew University) and at Tel Aviv University (Minerva Center for German History and School of Philosophy). Professor Sharvit is the author of Therapeutics and Salvation: Freud and Schelling on Freedom (Magnes Press) (in Hebrew) and co-editor and contributing author of the volumes Freud and Monotheism: The Violent Origins of Religion with Karen Feldman (Fordham University Press, 2018) and Canonization and Alterity: Heresy in Jewish History, Thought, and Literature with Willi Goetschel (De Gruyter, 2020). Amir Engel is a professor at the German Department of the Hebrew University and currently also a visiting professor for the history and present of Jewish-Christian relations at the Theological Faculty of the Humboldt University in Berlin. He studied philosophy, literature and cultural studies at the Hebrew University and earned his doctorate in German Studies at Stanford University, California. He then taught and researched at the Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main. His research focuses on religion, politics, literature, and the relationships between these three areas. His main topics include German-Jewish Romanticism and German-Jewish literature and culture in the post-war period. His first book, Gershom Scholem: An Intellectual Biography, was published in 2017, and he is currently finalizing his second book manuscript, tentatively titled The Politics of Spirituality: German, Jews and Christian 1900 - 1942 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

Dynamic Repetition: History and Messianism in Modern Jewish Thought (Brandeis UP, 2022) proposes a new understanding of modern Jewish theories of messianism across the disciplines of history, theology, and philosophy. The book explores how ideals of repetition, return, and the cyclical occasioned a new messianic impulse across an important swath of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century German Jewish thought. To grasp the complexities of Jewish messianism in modernity, the book focuses on diverse notions of “dynamic repetition” in the works of Franz Rosenzweig, Walter Benjamin, Franz Kafka, and Sigmund Freud, and their interrelations with basic trajectories of twentieth-century philosophy and critical thought. Gilad Sharvit is an assistant professor in the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Towson University. A scholar of modern Jewish thought, Sharvit's interests lie in Jewish philosophy, German-Jewish literature and culture, German and continental philosophy, psychoanalysis and critical theory. He completed his PhD studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the Philosophy Department and later accepted a Diller Post-Doctoral Fellowship at the Center for Jewish Studies at University of California, Berkeley (2014-16) and was a Townsend Fellow at the Townsend Center for the Humanities at University of California, Berkeley (2016-17). In 2017-18, Professor Sharvit was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Koebner Minerva Center for German History (Hebrew University) and at Tel Aviv University (Minerva Center for German History and School of Philosophy). Professor Sharvit is the author of Therapeutics and Salvation: Freud and Schelling on Freedom (Magnes Press) (in Hebrew) and co-editor and contributing author of the volumes Freud and Monotheism: The Violent Origins of Religion with Karen Feldman (Fordham University Press, 2018) and Canonization and Alterity: Heresy in Jewish History, Thought, and Literature with Willi Goetschel (De Gruyter, 2020). Amir Engel is a professor at the German Department of the Hebrew University and currently also a visiting professor for the history and present of Jewish-Christian relations at the Theological Faculty of the Humboldt University in Berlin. He studied philosophy, literature and cultural studies at the Hebrew University and earned his doctorate in German Studies at Stanford University, California. He then taught and researched at the Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main. His research focuses on religion, politics, literature, and the relationships between these three areas. His main topics include German-Jewish Romanticism and German-Jewish literature and culture in the post-war period. His first book, Gershom Scholem: An Intellectual Biography, was published in 2017, and he is currently finalizing his second book manuscript, tentatively titled The Politics of Spirituality: German, Jews and Christian 1900 - 1942 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: A Solomonoff Inductor Walks Into a Bar: Schelling Points for Communication, published by johnswentworth on July 26, 2024 on LessWrong. A Solomonoff inductor walks into a bar in a foreign land. (Stop me if you've heard this one before.) The bartender, who is also a Solomonoff inductor, asks "What'll it be?". The customer looks around at what the other patrons are having, points to an unfamiliar drink, and says "One of those, please.". The bartender points to a drawing of the same drink on a menu, and says "One of those?". The customer replies "Yes, one of those.". The bartender then delivers a drink, and it matches what the first inductor expected. What's up with that? The puzzle, here, is that the two Solomonoff inductors seemingly agree on a categorization - i.e. which things count as the Unnamed Kind Of Drink, and which things don't, with at least enough agreement that the customer's drink-type matches the customer's expectations. And the two inductors reach that agreement without learning the category from huge amounts of labeled data - one inductor points at an instance, another inductor points at another instance, and then the first inductor gets the kind of drink it expected. Why (and when) are the two inductors able to coordinate on roughly the same categorization? Most existing work on Solomonoff inductors, Kolmogorov complexity, or minimum description length can't say much about this sort of thing. The problem is that the customer/bartender story is all about the internal structure of the minimum description - the (possibly implicit) "categories" which the two inductors use inside of their minimal descriptions in order to compress their raw data. The theory of minimum description length typically treats programs as black boxes, and doesn't attempt to talk about their internal structure. In this post, we'll show one potential way to solve the puzzle - one potential way for two minimum-description-length-based minds to coordinate on a categorization. Main Tool: Natural Latents for Minimum Description Length Fundamental Theorem Here's the main foundational theorem we'll use. (Just the statement for now, more later.) We have a set of n data points (binary strings) {xi}, and a Turing machine TM. Suppose we find some programs/strings Λ,{ϕi},Λ',{ϕ'i} such that: Mediation: (Λ,ϕ1,…,ϕn) is an approximately-shortest string such that (TM(Λ,ϕi) = xi for all i) Redundancy: For all i, (Λ',ϕ'i) is an approximately-shortest string such that TM(Λ',ϕ'i) = xi.[1] Then: the K-complexity of Λ' given Λ,K(Λ'|Λ), is approximately zero - in other words, Λ' is approximately determined by Λ, in a K-complexity sense. (As a preview: later we'll assume that both Λ and Λ' satisfy both conditions, so both K(Λ'|Λ) and K(Λ|Λ') are approximately zero. In that case, Λ and Λ' are "approximately isomorphic" in the sense that either can be computed from the other by a short program. We'll eventually tackle the customer/bartender puzzle from the start of this post by suggesting that Λ and Λ' each encode a summary of things in one category according to one inductor, so the theorem then says that their category summaries are "approximately isomorphic".) The Intuition What does this theorem mean intuitively? Let's start with the first condition: (Λ,ϕ1,…,ϕn) is an approximately-shortest string such that (TM(Λ,ϕi) = xi for all i). Notice that there's a somewhat-trivial way to satisfy that condition: take Λ to be a minimal description of the whole dataset {xi}, take ϕi=i, and then add a little bit of code to Λ to pick out the datapoint at index ϕi[2]. So TM(Λ,ϕi) computes all of {xi} from Λ, then picks out index i. Now, that might not be the only approximately-minimal description (though it does imply that whatever approximately-minimal Λ,ϕ we do use is approximately a minimal description for all of x). ...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: A Solomonoff Inductor Walks Into a Bar: Schelling Points for Communication, published by johnswentworth on July 26, 2024 on The AI Alignment Forum. A Solomonoff inductor walks into a bar in a foreign land. (Stop me if you've heard this one before.) The bartender, who is also a Solomonoff inductor, asks "What'll it be?". The customer looks around at what the other patrons are having, points to an unfamiliar drink, and says "One of those, please.". The bartender points to a drawing of the same drink on a menu, and says "One of those?". The customer replies "Yes, one of those.". The bartender then delivers a drink, and it matches what the first inductor expected. What's up with that? The puzzle, here, is that the two Solomonoff inductors seemingly agree on a categorization - i.e. which things count as the Unnamed Kind Of Drink, and which things don't, with at least enough agreement that the customer's drink-type matches the customer's expectations. And the two inductors reach that agreement without learning the category from huge amounts of labeled data - one inductor points at an instance, another inductor points at another instance, and then the first inductor gets the kind of drink it expected. Why (and when) are the two inductors able to coordinate on roughly the same categorization? Most existing work on Solomonoff inductors, Kolmogorov complexity, or minimum description length can't say much about this sort of thing. The problem is that the customer/bartender story is all about the internal structure of the minimum description - the (possibly implicit) "categories" which the two inductors use inside of their minimal descriptions in order to compress their raw data. The theory of minimum description length typically treats programs as black boxes, and doesn't attempt to talk about their internal structure. In this post, we'll show one potential way to solve the puzzle - one potential way for two minimum-description-length-based minds to coordinate on a categorization. Main Tool: Natural Latents for Minimum Description Length Fundamental Theorem Here's the main foundational theorem we'll use. (Just the statement for now, more later.) We have a set of n data points (binary strings) {xi}, and a Turing machine TM. Suppose we find some programs/strings Λ,{ϕi},Λ',{ϕ'i} such that: Mediation: (Λ,ϕ1,…,ϕn) is an approximately-shortest string such that (TM(Λ,ϕi) = xi for all i) Redundancy: For all i, (Λ',ϕ'i) is an approximately-shortest string such that TM(Λ',ϕ'i) = xi.[1] Then: the K-complexity of Λ' given Λ,K(Λ'|Λ), is approximately zero - in other words, Λ' is approximately determined by Λ, in a K-complexity sense. (As a preview: later we'll assume that both Λ and Λ' satisfy both conditions, so both K(Λ'|Λ) and K(Λ|Λ') are approximately zero. In that case, Λ and Λ' are "approximately isomorphic" in the sense that either can be computed from the other by a short program. We'll eventually tackle the customer/bartender puzzle from the start of this post by suggesting that Λ and Λ' each encode a summary of things in one category according to one inductor, so the theorem then says that their category summaries are "approximately isomorphic".) The Intuition What does this theorem mean intuitively? Let's start with the first condition: (Λ,ϕ1,…,ϕn) is an approximately-shortest string such that (TM(Λ,ϕi) = xi for all i). Notice that there's a somewhat-trivial way to satisfy that condition: take Λ to be a minimal description of the whole dataset {xi}, take ϕi=i, and then add a little bit of code to Λ to pick out the datapoint at index ϕi[2]. So TM(Λ,ϕi) computes all of {xi} from Λ, then picks out index i. Now, that might not be the only approximately-minimal description (though it does imply that whatever approximately-minimal Λ,ϕ we do use is approximately a minimal description fo...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: (Approximately) Deterministic Natural Latents, published by johnswentworth on July 21, 2024 on LessWrong. Background: Natural Latents: The Math, Natural Latents: The Concepts, Why Care About Natural Latents?, the prototypical semantics use-case. This post does not assume that you've read all of those, or even any of them. Suppose I roll a biased die 1000 times, and then roll the same biased die another 1000 times. Then... Mediation: The first 1000 rolls are approximately independent of the second 1000 given the bias (to reasonable precision). Redundancy: I can estimate the die's bias (to reasonable precision) with high confidence from either the first or second 1000 rolls. The die's bias is therefore a natural latent, which means it has various nice properties. Minimality: The bias is the smallest summary of all the information about the first 1000 rolls relevant to the second 1000 (and vice-versa). Maximality: The bias is the largest piece of information which can be calculated from the first 1000 rolls and also can separately be calculated from the second 1000 rolls. Any other variable which satisfies the above properties must tell us (approximately) the same information about the die rolls as the bias. Furthermore, the bias is a(n approximate) deterministic natural latent: the die's bias (to reasonable precision) is approximately determined by[1] the first 1000 die rolls, and also approximately determined by the second 1000 die rolls. That implies one more nice property: Uniqueness: The bias is the unique-up-to(-approximate)-isomorphism latent which has the above properties, making it a natural Schelling point for communication between agents. We've proven all that before, mostly in Natural Latents: The Math (including the addendum added six months after the rest of the post). But it turns out that the math is a lot shorter and simpler, and easily yields better bounds, if we're willing to assume (approximate) determinism up-front. That does lose us some theoretical tools (notably the resampling construction), but it gives a cleaner foundation for our expected typical use cases (like e.g. semantics). The goal of this post is to walk through that math. Background Tool: Determinism in Diagrams We're going to use diagrammatic proofs, specifically using Bayes nets. But it's non-obvious how to express (approximate) determinism using Bayes nets, or what rules diagrams follow when determinism is involved, so we'll walk through that first. This diagram says that Y is (approximately) determined by X: Intuitively, the literal interpretation of the diagram is: X mediates between Y and Y, i.e. Y itself tells me nothing more about Y once I already know X. That only makes sense if X tells me everything there is to know about Y, i.e. Y is determined by X. In the approximate case, we express the approximation error of the diagram as a KL-divergence, same as usual: ϵDKL(P[X=x,Y=y,Y=y']||P[X=x]P[Y=y|X=x]P[Y=y'|X=x]) If you get confused later about what it means to have two copies of the same variable in a diagram, go back to that line; that's the definition of the approximation error of the diagram. (One way to view that definition: there's actually two variables Y and Y', but P says that Y and Y' always have the same value.) That approximation error simplifies: DKL(P[X=x,Y=y,Y=y']||P[X=x]P[Y=y|X=x]P[Y=y'|X=x]) =DKL(P[X=x,Y=y]I[y=y']||P[X=x]P[Y=y|X=x]P[Y=y'|X=x]) =x,y,y'P[X=x,Y=y]I[y=y'](log(P[X=x,Y=y]I[y=y'])log(P[X=x]P[Y=y|X=x]P[Y=y'|X=x])) =x,yP[X=x,Y=y](log(P[X=x,Y=y])log(P[X=x]P[Y=y|X=x]P[Y=y|X=x])) =x,yP[X=x,Y=y]log(P[Y=y|X=x]) =H(Y|X) So the diagram says Y is determined by X, and the approximation error of the diagram is the entropy H of Y given X - i.e. the number of bits required on average to specify Y once one already knows X. Very intuitive! The Dangly Bit Lemma Intuitiv...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: We ran an AI safety conference in Tokyo. It went really well. Come next year!, published by Blaine on July 18, 2024 on LessWrong. Abstract Technical AI Safety 2024 (TAIS 2024) was a conference organised by AI Safety 東京 and Noeon Research, in collaboration with Reaktor Japan, AI Alignment Network and AI Industry Foundation. You may have heard of us through ACX. The goals of the conference were 1. demonstrate the practice of technical safety research to Japanese researchers new to the field 2. share ideas among established technical safety researchers 3. establish a good international reputation for AI Safety 東京 and Noeon Research 4. establish a Schelling conference for people working in technical safety We sent out a survey after the conference to get feedback from attendees on whether or not we achieved those goals. We certainly achieved goals 1, 2 and 3; goal 4 remains to be seen. In this post we give more details about the conference, share results from the feedback survey, and announce our intentions to run another conference next year. Okay but like, what was TAIS 2024? Technical AI Safety 2024 (TAIS 2024) was a small non-archival open academic conference structured as a lecture series. It ran over the course of 2 days from April 5th-6th 2024 at the International Conference Hall of the Plaza Heisei in Odaiba, Tokyo. We had 18 talks covering 6 research agendas in technical AI safety: Mechanistic Interpretability Developmental Interpretability Scaleable Oversight Agent Foundations Causal Incentives ALIFE …including talks from Hoagy Cunningham (Anthropic), Noah Y. Siegel (DeepMind), Manuel Baltieri (Araya), Dan Hendrycks (CAIS), Scott Emmons (CHAI), Ryan Kidd (MATS), James Fox (LISA), and Jesse Hoogland and Stan van Wingerden (Timaeus). In addition to our invited talks, we had 25 submissions, of which 19 were deemed relevant for presentation. 5 were offered talk slots, and we arranged a poster session to accommodate the remaining 14. In the end, 7 people presented posters, 5 in person and 2 in absentia. Our best poster award was won jointly by Fazl Berez for Large Language Models Relearn Removed Concepts and Alex Spies for Structured Representations in Maze-Solving Transformers. We had 105 in-person attendees (including the speakers). Our live streams had around 400 unique viewers, and maxed out at 18 concurrent viewers. Recordings of the conference talks are hosted on our youtube channel. How did it go? Very well, thanks for asking! We sent out a feedback survey after the event, and got 68 responses from in-person attendees (58% response rate). With the usual caveats that survey respondents are not necessarily a representative sample of the population: Looking good! Let's dig deeper. How useful was TAIS 2024 for those new to the field? Event satisfaction was high across the board, which makes it hard to tell how relatively satisfied population subgroups were. Only those who identified themselves as "new to AI safety" were neutrally satisfied, but the newbies were also the most likely to be highly satisfied. It seems that people new to AI safety had no more or less trouble understanding the talks than those who work for AI safety organisations or have published AI safety research: They were also no more or less likely to make new research collaborations: Note that there is substantial overlap between some of these categories, especially for categories that imply a strong existing relationship to AI safety, so take the above charts with a pinch of salt: Total New to AI safety Part of the AI safety community Employed by an AI safety org Has published AI safety research New to AI safety 26 100% 19% 12% 4% Part of the AI safety community 28 18% 100% 36% 32% Employed by an AI safety org 20 15% 50% 100% 35% Has published AIS research 13 8% 69% 54% 100% Subjectively, it fe...

You asked…we're answering! Alexandra Schelling (of @toolboxforlove on Instagram) and I polled our communities for questions about navigating our significant other's families, and we're answering the questions in a two-part episode. Today's episode is all about navigating relational dynamics with our partner's family. Should we set boundaries with our partner's family? Should they? How to navigate with family's criticism? How to create connection with in-laws? We explore all of these topics and how to respond to them more mindfully. For more of Alexandra's work, check out: Her Instagram Her YouTube — If you're loving the podcast… JOIN THE YOU LOVE AND YOU LEARN PATREON COMMUNITY FOR $7/month. — Additional resources: Join Deconstruct the Doubts digital course here (instant + lifetime access) Click here to join the waitlist for the next cohort of Beyond the Doubts group coaching Download the free video training: The Single Most Important Lesson in Healing Relationship Anxiety Visit my website Connect with me on Instagram

You asked…we're answering! Alexandra Schelling (of @toolboxforlove on Instagram) and I polled our communities for questions about navigating our significant other's families, and we're answering the questions in a two-part episode. Today's episode is all about what's happening in our OWN mind when it relates to our partner's family. Expectation vs. reality (and the anxiety that causes), insecurities when we compare to other people's relationships with their in-laws, and feeling triggered by specific interactions. We explore all of these topics and how to respond to them more mindfully. Stay tuned next week for part two about setting boundaries with in-laws! For more of Alexandra's work, check out: Her Instagram Her YouTube — If you're loving the podcast… JOIN THE YOU LOVE AND YOU LEARN PATREON COMMUNITY FOR $7/month. — Additional resources: Join Deconstruct the Doubts digital course here (instant + lifetime access) Click here to join the waitlist for the next cohort of Beyond the Doubts group coaching Download the free video training: The Single Most Important Lesson in Healing Relationship Anxiety Visit my website Connect with me on Instagram